AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 vs Intel Core 7 350 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is overwhelmingly one-sided. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 wins 14 of the 15 recorded benchmarks, with the Intel Core 7 350 taking only a single, narrow victory. The margin is not subtle; it is a structural gap.

The largest win for the AMD part comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 200665 against 33734 for the Intel chip. That is a delta of 494.8%, meaning the AMD processor delivers nearly five times the integer throughput. This is the single biggest proportional gap in the entire comparison. Data compression follows closely, with the AMD part scoring 690650 versus 143123, a 382.6% advantage. Extended instructions show a 367.8% delta (56346 vs 12045), and random string sorting shows a 341.9% delta (76177 vs 17238). These are not marginal differences; they indicate a completely different performance class.

Multi-core rendering benchmarks reinforce the pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD part scores 35314 against 8030 for the Intel, a 339.8% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 347.8% delta (5463 vs 1220). PassMark multi-thread shows a 262.1% delta (54934 vs 15170). The AMD part's 16 cores and 32 threads simply overwhelm the Intel part's 6 cores and 6 threads in any workload that scales with parallelism.

The AMD part also wins in floating-point math, scoring 128682 against 42809, a 200.6% delta. Data encryption shows a 224.3% delta (35455 vs 10933). Prime number finding shows a 183.2% delta (303 vs 107). Physics simulation shows a 196.8% delta (3481 vs 1173).

Single-threaded results are far closer, which is the one area where the Intel part can compete. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Intel Core 7 350 scores 2046 against 2044 for the AMD part, a delta of -0.1%. This is effectively a tie, but the Intel part is recorded as the winner. PassMark single-thread shows the AMD part ahead by only 1.1% (4147 vs 4100). Cinebench R15 single-core also goes to the AMD part, 316 vs 292, an 8.2% delta. The data suggests that for lightly threaded tasks, the two processors are nearly equivalent, with the Intel part having a razor-thin edge in one specific test.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide explains the benchmark disparity. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo, and uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process from Intel. Both are mobile parts, but they are engineered for different purposes.

Core counts differ sharply. The AMD part has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel part has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel part has no hyper-threading, which is a significant handicap in multi-threaded workloads. The AMD part's base clock is 3.00 GHz with a boost of 5.10 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 1.50 GHz with a boost of 4.80 GHz. The lower base clock on the Intel part is notable, though boost clocks are closer.

Cache configurations also diverge. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and only 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's 64 MB L3 is more than ten times larger than the Intel part's 6 MB, which helps in cache-sensitive workloads.

Memory support is another differentiator. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel memory bus and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but uses a single-channel memory bus with only 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. That is a 4.3x difference in theoretical memory bandwidth, which likely contributes to the AMD part's dominance in data-heavy tasks like compression and encryption. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

PCIe lanes differ as well. The AMD part has Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the Intel part has Gen 4 with only 6 lanes. Both have integrated graphics, but the AMD part uses a Radeon 8060S, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The AMD part's TDP is 55 watts, while the Intel part's TDP is 15 watts. This suggests the Intel part is designed for far lower power envelopes, which is consistent with its lower core count and clock speeds.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is the faster processor in nearly every measurable way, and the gap is largest where it matters most: multi-core throughput and memory-intensive workloads. Its average benchmark score is 77740, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 7 350 has an average score of 17779, placing it in the 71st percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX (avg score 76513, delta 1.6%) and the Intel Core i9-14900K (avg score 79097, delta -1.7%). The Intel part's nearest rivals are far lower, including the Intel Core 5 221TE (avg score 17860, delta -0.5%) and the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (avg score 17891, delta -0.6%).

For users who need maximum compute performance in a mobile package, the AMD part is the clear choice. Its 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with 64 MB of L3 and quad-channel memory, make it suitable for rendering, compilation, data analysis, and any parallel workload. The Intel part, with its 6 cores and 6 threads, 6 MB of L3, and single-channel memory, is not in the same class for these tasks.

The one area where the Intel part can claim a win is the Cinebench R23 single-core test, where it scores 2046 versus 2044. This is a 0.1% margin, which is within noise. For light, single-threaded tasks, both processors will feel similar. The Intel part also has a substantially lower TDP of 15 watts versus 55 watts, which may matter in fanless or ultra-portable designs.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Intel Core 7 350 scores 2046 against 2044 for the AMD part, a delta of -0.1%. In PassMark single-thread, the AMD part scores 4147 against 4100, a delta of 1.1%.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD part scores 35314 against 8030 for the Intel part, a delta of 339.8%. In PassMark multi-thread, the AMD part scores 54934 against 15170, a delta of 262.1%.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has a quad-channel memory bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 7 350 has a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

Q: What are the TDP values?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has a TDP of 55 watts. The Intel Core 7 350 has a TDP of 15 watts.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 wins in every multi-threaded and data-intensive benchmark. It dominates integer math (494.8% delta), data compression (382.6% delta), extended instructions (367.8% delta), random string sorting (341.9% delta), and multi-core rendering (339.8% delta in Cinebench R23). It also wins in floating-point math (200.6% delta), data encryption (224.3% delta), prime number finding (183.2% delta), physics simulation (196.8% delta), and PassMark multi-thread (262.1% delta). For any workload that uses multiple cores, heavy memory bandwidth, or large caches, the AMD part is the only rational choice.

The Intel Core 7 350 wins exactly one benchmark: Cinebench R23 single-core, with a score of 2046 versus 2044, a delta of -0.1%. This is a statistical tie, but it does indicate that the Intel part's single-threaded performance is competitive. The Intel part also has a significantly lower TDP of 15 watts versus 55 watts, which could make it preferable for battery-constrained or passively cooled systems. However, the benchmark data shows that the AMD part's single-thread scores are nearly identical (PassMark single-thread: 4147 vs 4100, a 1.1% delta), so the Intel part's practical advantage is minimal.

The use-case split is therefore clear: the AMD part for compute-heavy mobile workstations, the Intel part for ultra-low-power designs where the 15 watt TDP is a hard requirement and multi-core performance is secondary.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors:

• Cores: AMD 16, Intel 6
• Threads: AMD 32, Intel 6
• Base clock: AMD 3.00 GHz, Intel 1.50 GHz
• Boost clock: AMD 5.10 GHz, Intel 4.80 GHz
• TDP: AMD 55 watts, Intel 15 watts
• Socket: AMD Socket FP11, Intel BGA 1516
• Architecture: AMD Zen 5, Intel not specified (Wildcat Lake codename)
• Process node: AMD 4 nm (TSMC), Intel 3 nm (Intel)
• L1 cache: AMD 80 KB per core, Intel 192 KB per core
• L2 cache: AMD 1 MB per core, Intel 2.5 MB per core
• L3 cache: AMD 64 MB shared, Intel 6 MB shared
• Memory support: AMD LPDDR5X, Intel DDR5 and LPDDR5X
• Memory bus: AMD Quad-channel, Intel Single-channel
• Memory bandwidth: AMD 256.0 GB/s, Intel 59.7 GB/s
• ECC memory: AMD yes, Intel no
• PCIe: AMD Gen 4, 16 lanes, Intel Gen 4, 6 lanes
• Integrated graphics: AMD Radeon 8060S, Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe)
• Release date: AMD 2025-01-05, Intel 2026-04-15
• Part number: AMD 100-000001099, Intel SAE3F